Rosen? What kind of name is that? It doesn't sound like a good Christian name. I think it might represent one of those other religions: Jewish, Baha'i, Zoroastrian, Hittite, Druze, Yazidi, Mandean, Gnostic...who can keep up with all those things people call themselves? If it doesn't fit in to my narrow view of how things should be, it's all just weird. It's fair game to just dismiss those weirdos out of hand.

“You all make science a laughing stock. You present science and facts just to present your viewpoint.” - Sandy Rios Family PAC

It's probably time for the DP to just go ahead and create a whole new section of "news" dedicated to "gender" issues. They could call it "Alphabet Soup". Then, every day, those who want 24/7/365 coverage of all things GLBTQRSTUV can find it in one convenient spot. Those of us who couldn't care less about someone else's sexual preferences (sexual orientation is a bogus term) and their endless desire for validation, can browse the news without all the unnecessary clutter and random assortments of consonants.

vercingetorix wrote:Ditto with the Postal Service; although I don't use "snail-mail" as much as I used to, I still want to be able to mail a letter if the need arises. Notice I didn't resort to name-calling or any sort of type-casting while stating my conservative interests in these areas.

"Snail-mail" isn't name calling or typecasting? Hmmm. Try mailing something from Mexico - the postcards I sent to friends took two and a half months to arrive. Trying mailing something from Italy - one small box took nearly two months.

The USPS can get a letter from here to either coast in just two days. Looks great to me.

Crime has decreased since retail marijuana was legalized, but the Denver Post won't tell you because it interferes with their prohibitionist propaganda.

JAFA wrote:It's probably time for the DP to just go ahead and create a whole new section of "news" dedicated to "gender" issues. They could call it "Alphabet Soup". Then, every day, those who want 24/7/365 coverage of all things GLBTQRSTUV can find it in one convenient spot. Those of us who couldn't care less about someone else's sexual preferences (sexual orientation is a bogus term) and their endless desire for validation, can browse the news without all the unnecessary clutter and random assortments of consonants.

You know what you should do, right?

In order to show those pesky gays how their desires/attractions are a choice, and how easy it is to choose, you should choose to be gay for a week...you know, just to show them how easy it is to make the choice regarding orientation/preference..

derecho64 wrote:One conservative straight white male member of the elite doesn't understand why another conservative straight white male of the elite is criticized.

Of course.

Before you guys all go "%^#$@ Rosen", perhaps you should take a broader look.

DP OpEd Board wrote:Some, including us, may take issue with the way he characterized a sensitive topic, but that alone does not make for hate speech. It was free speech, and that's something we should all support.

JAFA wrote:It's probably time for the DP to just go ahead and create a whole new section of "news" dedicated to "gender" issues. They could call it "Alphabet Soup". Then, every day, those who want 24/7/365 coverage of all things GLBTQRSTUV can find it in one convenient spot. Those of us who couldn't care less about someone else's sexual preferences (sexual orientation is a bogus term) and their endless desire for validation, can browse the news without all the unnecessary clutter and random assortments of consonants.

You know what you should do, right?

In order to show those pesky gays how their desires/attractions are a choice, and how easy it is to choose, you should choose to be gay for a week...you know, just to show them how easy it is to make the choice regarding orientation/preference..

Are you saying that all homosexual behavior is predetermined by genetics?

ktrav wrote:Two things: who at CU was so blind as to put a pure propagandist like Rosen on the committee to hire (something as dumb) as a 'conservative scholar' position?!?

Second: nobody should be surprised that the dishonest propagandist Rosen defends the childish, bullying, bizarre, dishonest, low and anything-but-scholarly insults flung like so much feces by Hayward. It's how Rosen operates.

President Benson.

A lie will circle the globe before the truth has the chance to put its boots on. Terry Pratchett.

If you plan on winning based on the other team's best player getting hurt, and not on your team's abilities, you don't deserve to win anything.

JAFA wrote:It's probably time for the DP to just go ahead and create a whole new section of "news" dedicated to "gender" issues. They could call it "Alphabet Soup". Then, every day, those who want 24/7/365 coverage of all things GLBTQRSTUV can find it in one convenient spot. Those of us who couldn't care less about someone else's sexual preferences (sexual orientation is a bogus term) and their endless desire for validation, can browse the news without all the unnecessary clutter and random assortments of consonants.

You know what you should do, right?

In order to show those pesky gays how their desires/attractions are a choice, and how easy it is to choose, you should choose to be gay for a week...you know, just to show them how easy it is to make the choice regarding orientation/preference..

No one has control over what thoughts enter their mind, or the feelings they experience. However, we ALL have a choice regarding exactly how we react to those thoughts and feelings.

The University of Colorado proudly claims Justice Byron White as an alum. CU had a distinguished Political Science Professor, Dr. Rozek, who was conservative, brilliant and a gentleman. Both men are now deceased. If they had sat on the selection committee, the University of Colorado might well have been able to find a better "visiting conservative" than Professor Hayward, who mocks the University's policies and its students.

If Hayward's published comments are an example of his scholarship, then it would have been much cheaper for CU just to put a radio in the classroom and tune to any of the right wing talk shows, such as Rosen's or Limbaugh. Perhaps that is Rosen's goal.

How very sad to see what has happened to what was once Colorado's leading public university.

I do not believe that this is "hate speech." I do believe that the Professor is entitled to academic freedom. I just don't believe that we taxpayers should have to pay for it.

Mike Rosen wrote;"Some may disagree, but no reasonable person could find anything remotely hateful or oppressive in his analysis."

Therein lies the problem, liberal/progressive oppressors are anything but reasonable. In their mind the fact that someone's opinion differs from theirs' qualifies it as hate speech.

So, if your boss tells your co-worker that you have a nice rack, it is perfectly all right because it is not hateful?

Was your comment directed at me? Because your train of thought seems to have been derailed. Your response doesn't seem to have anything to do with my comment. In any case, I believe there is a difference between sexual harassment and hate speech, is it even sexual harassment when the person you're talking about is not present? I'm pretty sure it's not hate speech to speak well of someone's physical appearance, admiring their looks is hardly hateful.

estebanico wrote:So he got criticized...and that was pretty much the end of it.

What Rosen fails to mention is that a few members of the BFA tried to make it into a bigger deal, and the overwhelming response from the faculty was that Hayward was loutish, but that he has his freedom of speech, which must be protected else we lose our own some day.

This is a great country. You have the freedom to be a boorish ignoramus completely lacking in cultural civilities. But if such a person is going to hold the title of esteemed professor of conservative thought, don't you think you might want to show a little more class? I mean, I almost expect better from the usual freepers who comment here daily and complain that this country is going down the tubes because their petty little backward prejudices are not the theme of every story in the DP and every movie at your local theater.

Mike Rosen wrote;"Some may disagree, but no reasonable person could find anything remotely hateful or oppressive in his analysis."

Therein lies the problem, liberal/progressive oppressors are anything but reasonable. In their mind the fact that someone's opinion differs from theirs' qualifies it as hate speech.

So, if your boss tells your co-worker that you have a nice rack, it is perfectly all right because it is not hateful?

Was your comment directed at me? Because your train of thought seems to have been derailed. Your response doesn't seem to have anything to do with my comment. In any case, I believe there is a difference between sexual harassment and hate speech, is it even sexual harassment when the person you're talking about is not present? I'm pretty sure it's not hate speech to speak well of someone's physical appearance, admiring their looks is hardly hateful.

Exactly what I thought you would say. Sexual harassment is a matter of admiration. Telling racial jokes is just comedy. Making fun of your employer's sexual orientation policies falls into the same category. Any criticism of such comments is oppression by liberal/progressives, bla, bla. barf.

HEF wrote;Exactly what I thought you would say. Sexual harassment is a matter of admiration. Telling racial jokes is just comedy. Making fun of your employer's sexual orientation policies falls into the same category. Any criticism of such comments is oppression by liberal/progressives, bla, bla. barf.

"Exactly what I thought you would say" - except I never said 3 out of the 4 things you bring up. And the one thing I do respond to you have extrapolated on my response. And still there is a distinct difference between harassment and hate speech. You are proving my point that liberals believe anything that doesn't align perfectly with their ideology is by default hate speech. Thank you for providing evidence confirming my postulation.

JAFA wrote:It's probably time for the DP to just go ahead and create a whole new section of "news" dedicated to "gender" issues. They could call it "Alphabet Soup". Then, every day, those who want 24/7/365 coverage of all things GLBTQRSTUV can find it in one convenient spot. Those of us who couldn't care less about someone else's sexual preferences (sexual orientation is a bogus term) and their endless desire for validation, can browse the news without all the unnecessary clutter and random assortments of consonants.

You know what you should do, right?

In order to show those pesky gays how their desires/attractions are a choice, and how easy it is to choose, you should choose to be gay for a week...you know, just to show them how easy it is to make the choice regarding orientation/preference..

No one has control over what thoughts enter their mind, or the feelings they experience. However, we ALL have a choice regarding exactly how we react to those thoughts and feelings.

Okay, so you are saying if the need arose, you could stop acting on your (presumably heterosexual) thoughts and feelings, and be either completely celibate or only have relations with the same sex?